Abstract
Sometimes, agents do the right thing for the right reason. What's the normative significance of this phenomenon? According to proponents of the special status view, when an agent acts for the right reason, her actions enjoy a special normative status, namely, worthiness. Proponents of this view claim that self-effacing forms of consequentialism cannot say this plausible thing, and, worse, are blocked from having a perspicuous view of matters by the self-effacing nature of their consequentialism. In this article, I argue that this claim is based on an illicit assumption. I show that whatever version of the special status view proponents of that view prefer, self-effacing consequentialists can adopt a version of it. Moreover, I show that proponents of extant versions of the special status view have reason to prefer the specific version of that view I articulate on behalf of self-effacing consequentialists.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Subject
Sociology and Political Science,Philosophy
Reference50 articles.
1. Counterfactuals and Epistemic Basing Relations;Bondy;Pacific Philosophical Quarterly,2015
2. Thought
3. Moral Worth
4. Effort and Moral Worth
5. Acting for the Right Reasons
Cited by
2 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
1. Moral worth;Philosophy Compass;2024-04
2. The Right Wrong‐Makers;Philosophy and Phenomenological Research;2020-08-15